Iain Hall's SANDPIT

Home » Posts tagged 'Facebook' (Page 2)

Tag Archives: Facebook

The squawking of twitter

Ah the joys of social media!

click for source

To be entirely frank I am delighted by this development because it means that those people who have believed that twitter is a place where the malicious things that they have blasted out into the ether would never  have repercussions for them  are  now reaping what they have sown.  and the man who has been so cruelly defamed with the most vile accusations that can be imagined is showing the arrogant  that there is no such thing as a free pass on the electronic super highway.

More power to Lord McAlpine’s arm Comrades

“A world of perpetual memory”

The issue of cyber bullying is something that I am rather concerned about, so this announcement from Tony Abbott and the coalition is most timely and welcome. Having experienced some of the worst of online bullying myself anything that makes life harder for online scum-bags gets my tick of approval.

Cheers Comrades

 

 

Due to threats from Iain Hall, the editor ’99’ will be temporarily on a break from this blog

What a load of nonsense this post is! I have only ever written one email to this blog politely asking why my comments have been disallowed. The claim that I have accessed any other email address is just a flat out lie.
My what a lot of weaklings you lot must be if you run screaming from one single email sent to the blogs official and public address. So I challenge the blog owners here to put up the proof of your ludicrous claims or withdraw them.
Cheers Comrades

Turn Left 2013

Apparently being blocked from a blog is not enough for some people.

They manage to access a private email account only family and work colleagues have.

So for a little while, a new editor will be stepping in to manage the comments.

Thank you Jo Nakashima, and there is a trash and block as spam button, ineffective as they are, use them.

– 99 for Turn Left

View original post

Social Media, Online Privacy and Free Speech Anonymity: a guest post by Fiona Causer

Freedom of speech is one of the most treasured rights of citizens of democratic nations around the world. Yet debate about freedom of speech continues in the twenty-first century as technology provides new methods of communication.  For with these new communication channels come new challenges to professionals in the position of protecting these free speech rights.  This makes the demand for savvier legal practitioners even greater than before.  In order to have a chance to defend future victims of violated online trust, many paralegal online education programs are tasked with providing technologically-aware graduates ready to face these potential violations to online privacy and free speech.

More than ten million Australians use Facebook and millions of others use other social media sites such as Twitter and YouTube to share information with friends and families and, sometimes, to express political opinions. While no one suggests that the explosion of social media use should be curtailed, many people are concerned over the forum social networking sites provide for anonymous comments, which can often contain vitriol that the posters would not necessarily express if they were face-to-face with someone with an opposing view.

Many Facebook users assume their posts are viewable only by their friends, but anything that has been posted online can be found and viewed by computer-savvy hackers, sometimes with dramatic consequences. Numerous people have been fired after making derogatory comments on Facebook or Twitter about their employers.

The consequences of some social media posts are far greater than an individual’s firing when the comments are of a political nature. For example, a private site on Facebook used by more than 1000 current and former members of the Australian military was discovered to have numerous posts that were offensive to women, Muslims and immigrants. Hundreds of the posts included expletives and hateful language. The discovery of the site, which has now been shut down, created a scandal in the Australian army and will likely result in the firing of the posters.
In another instance, Tony Mitchell, an Australian teaching English in Bahrain, was fired from his position and deported for writing about the political unrest in the country on his Facebook account. According to an article on NextWeb.com, Mitchell found out that his Facebook page was being monitored by people he had added as friends to his page who then forwarded the information to his university’s human resources department.

Situations such as Mitchell’s may encourage some social media users to create fake identities to protect themselves yet be open about their opinions. However, the ability to hide an identity on social media could lead to abuses if users use their anonymity to write inflammatory posts. If anonymous or false identities become too prevalent, it may be possible that restrictions could be put in place on social media networks to prevent this type of behaviour.

In order to take full advantage of the benefits of social media without compromising a person’s employment or safety, users of social media are advised to be careful about what they post. Embarrassing photos, rude comments about other people, explosive political rants and complaints about work can all cause personal problems such as loss of employment or the loss of important relationships. A good rule of thumb to avoid problems with social media is to assume that every item posted may be read by an employer and a close relative. Anything that would offend either of those people may be better left off a social media site. While freedom of speech is a right that every Australian treasures, with freedom comes responsibility.

About time! or No more lunch time legends

Click for source

Sadly the collected unwashed who have just been evicted from this rather stupid and  pointless protest won’t face anything more severe than the equivalent to a slap on the wrist, to the Latte sipping Loonies though these protesters are undoubtedly some sort of heroes but we more sensible souls just know that really they are like pimples on the bum of society. annoying but easily fixed with the application of some focused pressure.
Cheers Comrades

what to do with social pustules

Lesbian chix abuse foster children

There is so much wrong here:

click for source

What sensible parent posts any pictures of their own children on social networking sites?

What sort of foster parent would post any  pictures of a child they are caring for on a social networking site?

What sort of public servant would approve someone who is in the process of medically assisted  self-mutilation as a carer for vulnerable children?

What sort of people are these women who would treat foster children like some sort of dolls to be used for their own wish fullfillmet?

Cheers comrades

Idiots and computers

Facebook ain't 'Faceless' boys - 4 years in the slammer for these two Einsteins.

Much has been said about the so-called underlying political & economic causes of the recent riots in London and other parts of England. Most of it wrong in my opinion. If the riots were the actions of the underclasses, the disenfranchised or the lost youth ‘lashing out’ against the system that so disadvantages them, then where were the slogans, the chants and the political messages you would expect to accompany the general angst?

I didn’t see any placards or banners that read “Overthrow the rich – feed the poor” or “We’ve had enough, revolution NOW!”, or words to that effect. Moreover, I didn’t hear any rioters and looters articulate that point of view, which seems to have come only from the armchair ‘experts’ and those who just want to put it down to it all being the fault of the government and corporations.

It wasn’t, and the experts out there are just pissing in the wind whereas, from what I saw, the riots were more symptomatic of a people who had lost all sense of right and wrong and who had been conditioned to believe that what they were doing was not even real. That’s certainly  how it looked.
 
And then there’s the role played by the use of social media to whip up a storm and quickly rally other users, be it by Blackberry, Facebook or Twitter, to go on the rampage … just for the sheer f*cking sake of it:

Two men have been jailed for four years after pleading guilty to inciting disorder via social networking sites – the longest sentences so far. Jordan Blackshaw, 20, and Perry Sutcliffe-Keenan, 22, who were arrested last week, were sentenced at Chester Crown Court. Their jail terms are the most severe yet to be handed out by the courts following the riots in London and other English cities.

Blackshaw, from Marston near Northwich, and Sutcliffe-Keenan, from Warrington, used Facebook to incite violence. The court heard Cheshire Police discovered a Facebook event entitled “Smash Down Northwich Town” created by Blackshaw. It clearly stated who it was created by and gave a time and place to meet “behind maccies” [believed to mean McDonalds].

The invitation also mentioned it was intended for the receipt of the “MOB HILL MASSIVE NORTHWICH LOOTIN”. Blackshaw posted the first comment, saying: “WE’LL NEED TO GET ON THIS KICKIN OFF ALL OVER”. Sutcliffe-Keenan also set up a Facebook page encouraging disorder called “WARRINGTON RIOTS” with a date and time. A witness identified the defendant from a photo which was posted on the site and he was listed as its sole creator.

Martin McRobb, Crown Advocate for the CPS, said: “They both used Facebook to organise and orchestrate serious disorder at a time when such incidents were taking place in other parts of the country. “Both defendants, in Northwich and Warrington respectively, sought to gain widespread support in order to replicate similar criminality.” He added: “These posts caused significant panic and revulsion in local communities as rumours of anticipated violence spread.”

The two defendants were “previously of good character”, the CPS said. Their offences carried a maximum sentence of 10 years.

Assistant Chief Constable of Cheshire Police, Phil Thompson, said: “The sentences passed down recognise how technology can be abused to incite criminal activity and sends a strong message to potential troublemakers about the extent to which ordinary people value safety and order in their lives and their communities. “Anyone who seeks to undermine that will face the full force of the law. “During the sentencing, Recorder of Chester Judge Elgin Edwards, QC, said he hoped the sentences would act as a deterrent to others.

Yeah, I hope it will deter others too, but I seriously doubt it will. You have to admit that there’s a strong case to be made here for some kind of intervention in the misuse of social media by the miscreant and mainly anonymous cretins out there, who seem to think it’s all a big joke and a “Lulz” to take the system and individuals down. To tear society and other people to shreds. To have no conscience over their actions. You know,  to be like the authors of that blog we have often referred to here as “SW”.

Here’s a good suggestion for The Age, which likes to regard itself as a great protector of free speech. How about getting one of your senior writers like, say, Jo Chandler, to do a piece on why anonymity on the Internet is okay and why it should be ‘anything goes’, even if it’s illegal and causes social upheaval and damages people’s reputations? She’d be just the person to do that.

Okay, I couldn’t resist including that and I’m not sure if these two dolts from England, who have copped 4 years each, were even operating anonymously. Looking at them though, I wouldn’t be surprised if they were stupid enough to incite violence under their real names. But the question this raises is:

Should there be tighter controls on the use of social mediums like Twitter, Facebook and even blogs?

I’m voting yes – idiots and computers go hand in hand so I think we need some regulation to abate the harm they do.

.

Let’s go for a f*ck walk

This protester was worried his mum might recognise him.

So it’s Saturday afternoon in Melbourne’s winter and you’re a teenager. What the hell is there to do? If you’re not into playing footy (or going to a game) the choices can be pretty limited. Not enough money to go skiing in the mountains? Okay, why not wander into Acland or Chapel Streets and have a latte (or beer) with your mates? For the outer suburbanite there’s always the shopping malls to hang out in.

But, if you’re into a bit of passive exercise and want to let off some steam (I mean, life is so stressful for kids, isn’t it?), why not go for a walk? A protest walk in the city. You know, to stir up a bit of attention and mouth off at authority, wouldn’t that be cool? Now, what cause is worth supporting? Gay marriage or the right to dress like a slut? Nah, done all that.

Hmm, what is FaceBook recommending? Err, what … A FUCK WALK? That sounds pretty good:

HUNDREDS of potty-mouthed protesters hurled or wore obscenities in defiance of new police powers allowing crude outbursts to be slapped with an instant fine. The aptly-titled “F… Walk” saw up to 400 people – mainly teenagers – chanting profanities and calling for free speech, not fines in a march through the CBD today.

According to the organiser, 23-y.o. Reubin Williams, “the walk was designed to highlight the difference between swearing as a part of expression, and anti-social, offensive or violent behaviour.” Thanks for explaining that Reubin:

“It’s a freedom of speech issue,” Mr Williams said. “I feel restricting people’s language is unnecessary and the extent of the fine is ludicrous.

“You can swear without being a lout, and it doesn’t mean we are going to be breaking windows or be violent,” he said.

“If you do stub your toe and swear they can fine you for it, but that’s not to say they will.

“Police are saying they’re not using it for those circumstances, but they can and that’s concerning.”

And 16-y.o. James Melton agrees:

“The Government already has too much control over our lives, so controlling what we can say is a step too far,” he said.

Quite frankly, I am not a great supporter of the Baillieu government’s window-dressing attempt to crack down on law & order either. It’s not exactly striking at the heart of our street violence problem, but what else would you expect from a government that so far has proven to be underprepared to instigate any meaningful reforms?

However, when you look at this new law in isolation is it really an attempt to stifle free speech? And does it, as some critics have suggested, discriminate against younger people because (surprise, surprise) they are the group that tends to spend more time on the streets and, therefore, the ones more likely to be fined … and the least able to afford them?

Well, no and no.

Firstly, as Reubin himself points out, the law is not aimed at fining people for using profanities in non-threatening, non-anti-social ways. In my opinion it’s more about curbing loutish, drunken and/or intimidating public behaviour, especially in crowds, like at footy games. You know, the things that can lead to brawls and even riots. So why encourage young people to go into the streets and behave like louts, Reubin?

And secondly, to claim it discriminates against young people because there are more of them on the streets is a bit like saying road laws discriminate against taxi drivers because they spend more time on the roads.

Oh yeah, young people have far less freedom and are far more subject to heavy-handed police enforcement of social behaviour laws than what they were 20, 30 or 40 years ago. Haven’t you noticed? I mean, when young people went onto the streets like this to protest trivial matters like the Vietnam War, conscription and even the right to protest (in Queensland’s case) – while older drunks standing outside the pubs hurled obscenities at us like “get a f*cking job you long-haired hippy” – the police would just stand back and not use their batons against us wouldn’t they? They wouldn’t drag us off into paddy wagons with a few stiff kicks and belts around the ear either and we wouldn’t end up facing the Magistrates court in the morning. Like hell they didn’t.

Yes, young people have it so tough today and those police are just arseholes and really hate our youth They’re pigs – how very dare they seek to crack down on truly anti-social behaviour. 

Maybe Reubin, for his next trick, should organise another protest march against proposals to crack down on FaceBook and other social media sites that harass and harm others. I mean, it’s all in the name of free speech and the law has no right to protect innocent victims and bystanders from such vile behaviour.

I suggest you take up footy, Reubin, and take your frustrations out there on the field on a Saturday afternoon instead of on our streets … if you’ve really got any balls that is.

.

%d bloggers like this: